Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Myth 1: Intuition helps in reading peopleTed Bundy. Yup, the handsome, suave, well-educated serial killer. How many of his victims sensed his dark side? Around zero. How about his friends, family and co-workers? Around zero. The police had him in custody at one point during the manhunt. How keen were their sharpened gut instincts? He was removed from the suspect list. What about marriage and mate choosing? The USA divorce rate is approaching 50% and many that do not divorce are still not in a happy relationship. Yet most everyone is gut sure that their "sweetie" is special and for life. Wrong!

Myth 3: Intuition helps in foretelling the immediate future when there is dangerNote: The Swam intuited this subclausal response and parried it ahead of time.How many people failed to report to work in the WTC on 9/11 or cancelled their flights on the doomed aircraft? Oh, about the normal amount. The Titantic, The Hindenburg, Hiroshima; etc. Where was the standard deviation showing that at least some intuited this impending catastrophe? There was no deviation from the norm.

Quote: Myth 1: Intuition helps in reading peopleTed Bundy. Yup, the handsome, suave, well-educated serial killer. How many of his victims sensed his dark side? Around zero. How about his friends, family and co-workers? Around zero. The police had him in custody at one point during the manhunt. How keen were their sharpened gut instincts? He was removed from the suspect list. What about marriage and mate choosing? The USA divorce rate is approaching 50% and many that do not divorce are still not in a happy relationship. Yet most everyone is gut sure that their "sweetie" is special and for life. Wrong!

Aren't you using Ted Bundy's friends and co-worker's undeveloped intuition as a kind of straw man for intuition in general? Intuition is a lot like logic: not many people know how to use it correctly. Just because Ted Bundy's mailman didn't use it correctly, doesn't mean others can't.

Ever watch that 20/20 special with Larry Flynt in the Vegas Casinos? You might find it intresting.

What about the fighter who uses intuition to anticipate his opponents next move? When you put two equally matched fighters together, often victory is a test of intuition in those circumstances.

Quote: Myth 3: Intuition helps in foretelling the immediate future when there is dangerNote: The Swam intuited this subclausal response and parried it ahead of time.How many people failed to report to work in the WTC on 9/11 or cancelled their flights on the doomed aircraft? Oh, about the normal amount. The Titantic, The Hindenburg, Hiroshima; etc. Where was the standard deviation showing that at least some intuited this impending catastrophe? There was no deviation from the norm.

the statistical effect isnt visible because most people don't have developed intuition. The vast majority of people have lost touch with it. Everyone is capable of developing their intuition, but few make that choice.

First, intuition does help in reading people, along with body language and, realistically, pre-judgement.Citing a case among a near infinite amount of times people have used their intuition to read someone does not prove it doesn't help in reading someone's character.

As stated above, some people do not know how to use their intuition, and some people are good at deception.

Second, intuition is not seeing the future, because it is based not on rational processes. It exists without knowing why, or without a good reason.How easy is it for the cubicle slave or the business day-tripper to break out of routine on a hunch with no rational reason?If one had no intuition, no immediate cognition, one could not make survivalistic reactions. One would also have to decide to make a decision, which is an infinite process.

My intuition helps me make decisions without losing my entire day trying to weigh the pros, cons, and opportunity cost of doing something. Not saying that I don't think about any choice I make, but I do rely on my instinctive knowing. My intuition also makes me realize black is not white, 4 dollars is not 2 dollars...

--------------------Blas'?trid (bl?s tr?d)
n. 3rd generation derivitave of a combination of 'bastard' and 'blasted'. Used as both an insult or an expletive.
ex. Blastrid!

What about the fighter who uses intuition to anticipate his opponents next move? That is caled sports savvy. I regularly whip young pups on the racquetball court; not becuase I have any special brain function, but becuase I have been doing it for 35 years. It is called "predictability and pattern recognition."

When you put two equally matched fighters together, often victory is a test of intuition in those circumstances. More a test of conditioning, speed, endurance, power, skillset and anticipation based on watching your opponent fight other fighters.

--------------------The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire. -Teilard

Myth 1:maybe they didnt try to read ted bundy, they just thought of him as a nice guy, and didnt think twice about trying to read him. Which would kind of rule out precognition, i mean, these people were not spider man. goooh leee.he hee.

would intuition be considered a pre cognitive response, and reading someone be considered a concious action?

Myth 2: what about run lola run? She made the ball fall in slot 20. i dont know if anyone could really scream that loud though.

what is intuition though anyway? Would you consider it insinct? If so, Why would i need to insinctually need to know what the next number is going to be. ----

above all, wouldnt there have to be some system watching out for you to say... okay, you know, this doesnt feel right, so im gonna make such and such feeling. otherwise, you could just be getting a lot of mis leading thoughts, maybe you have ADD.

gee, SWAMI, I wouldn't peg you as the type of person who would take my rebuttal so personally as to necessitate two separate comments on it. I'm guessing that means you read and anylized it twice, too. Lighten up, dude

Quote: And you know this how? Would you care to give a shroomery class where we test everyone before and after you show us how to develop this latent ability?

Ahhhh, you're right SWAMI. The assertion i made was a belief based on an operational principle. Of course that principle does not stand absolute, I am merely employing it for purposes of optimism. The fact of the matter is, that some people are dead to intuition: theyre fucking hopeless. Maybe they've been restricted from that ability for some reason, like maybe its not part of their mission or purpose here. I don't know. I can only speculate on that. I like to speculate. And i like diversity of opinion; I think it makes the world a more intresting place.

But i do think that cultivating one's intuition goes against the grain of our society. This is one factor that makes a cultivated intuition a rarity, and thus, unlikely to cause any statistical anomalies on a mass scale.

As for my effectiveness in teaching intuition to others, well that is a pretty poor predictor of the existence and validity of cultivated intuition itself. I never claimed to be a teacher. I could maybe point someone in the right direction with a few book recommendations, but whether they took the reading seriously and followed through on their part would be up to them entirely. That fact of the matter is that there are some things that cannot be taught, they can only be learned by the individual. I think I have said this before.

BTW, what ever happened to your little "teach everyone to think like SWAMI" class? Was that effective? Is its inneffectiveness a legitimate predictor that your style of thought is bunk?

Oh, and why is it that so many skeptics and dissenters expect positive claimants to jump through all these inconvinient hoops to "prove their claim" by the standards of the skeptics, and then when the claimants are unwilling, the skeptics say that that unwillingness necessarily invalidates the claim?

And you know this how? Would you care to give a shroomery class where we look at all the available evidence? Or provide us with some kind of link?

There is no standard Swami dodge. Very "clever" though.

I did all this research before the internet. But you can probably find a link. As Mr. Mushrooms would say, "Do your own research." However. some facts are readily apparent. The Hindenburg and the Titantic were filled to capacity.

More importantly however, I did a study of US airplanes that went down and Amtrak trains that derailed from 1965 to 1985. Checked the average passenger load for the flight in question and for the previous year's average. No statistical difference. Checked cancellations as maybe the intuitive ones were more aware and were replaced by lemmings. No statistical difference in cancellations.

I don't think intuition gives you the ability to fortell upcoming dangerous events, as you specified.
It's possible to understand that people don't attend to their intuition--If you had a hunch about something serious, with no apparent reason or rationality, how often would you act on it?

I've been on a plane MANY times. I feel just a little bit nervous right before I get on, although it has decreased the more I fly. I think "what if".. maybe I shouldn't get on and find a way to drive there?
Well, the fact that I've been on a plane a bunch of times before and nothing has gone wrong comforts me and leads me to ignore my 'intuition'. Also the alternatives are terrible especially if I need to be where I'm flying soon.
Hmmm... I could be there in 3 hours, or I could drive for 2 days and lose 300 bucks on a plane ticket...with no apparent logical reason why...

--------------------Blas'?trid (bl?s tr?d)
n. 3rd generation derivitave of a combination of 'bastard' and 'blasted'. Used as both an insult or an expletive.
ex. Blastrid!

The fact of the matter is, that some people are dead to intuition: theyre fucking hopeless.

Everyone is capable of developing their intuition

Which is it? Your statements are contradictory. It is the intuitive masters that I am interested in. Naturally no one can point to any.

But i do think that cultivating one's intuition goes against the grain of our society. More dead filler.

This is one factor that makes a cultivated intuition a rarity, and thus, unlikely to cause any statistical anomalies on a mass scale. This statement points out your ignorance. A mass of people do not need to have the ability for it to show up. The mere existence of SOME people having intuition would be a blip in the statistics.

As for my effectiveness in teaching intuition to others, well that is a pretty poor predictor of the existence and validity of cultivated intuition itself.Agreed.

I could maybe point someone in the right direction with a few book recommendations, but whether they took the reading seriously and followed through on their part would be up to them entirely. But we have no way of knowing that the author has any more knowledge nor ability than anyone else. All we know is that the author can get a book published.

That fact of the matter is that there are some things that cannot be taught, they can only be learned by the individual. Huh?

BTW, what ever happened to your little "teach everyone to think like SWAMI" class? Was that effective? Is its inneffectiveness a legitimate predictor that your style of thought is bunk? I see it is impossible for you to keep it non-personal nor to even get your facts straight. Go back and read if you so choose. There was nothing that told people what to think nor was it a class on logic. Lack of follow through by the majority of those signing up was why I cancelled it.

Oh, and why is it that so many skeptics and dissenters expect positive claimants to jump through all these inconvinient hoops to "prove their claim" by the standards of the skeptics, and then when the claimants are unwilling, the skeptics say that that unwillingness necessarily invalidates the claim?

How to make it simple for you. Some claim intuition exists. This belief MUST be based on some observation - Yes or No?

Can others observe the same (or a similar) thing - Yes or No?

Is this repeatable - Yes or No?

Are their other possible explanantions - Yes or No?

This type of inquiry has led to most all discoveries. At no time were any hoops involved.

Quote:Swami said: There was nothing that told people what to think nor was it a class on logic. Lack of follow through by the majority of those signing up was why I cancelled it.

Maybe you were to impatient?

I was interested in what you had to say but I also have a life that needs tending to as well.

I know I am not "the majority", so I do not expect further explanation.

I just know that you made a statement about what a waste it was that this community could not get together in any meaningful way, and then you just bail out without further ado. Oh well, I guess it's not that important.

--------------------I may not always tell the truth, but atleast I'm honest
-----------

I see what everyone is saying. It is so hard to form an opinion when you see both sides so clearly!

I think Swami cancelling the class without notice says more about him and his way of thinking than it does about the participants who seemed willing, if understandably unsure of what was expected of them.